click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
and secretary clinton did, we understand the red line, but the world this week certainly growing concern about syria's potential use of chemical weapons. can we ask you your view on this, how concerned are you? how imminent are your concerns? should assad believe that his weapons are sheltered and safe from potential response, a potential military action by anyone? >> well, without commenting on the specific intelligence that we have with regards to the chemical weapons, i think there is no question that we remain very concerned, very concerned that as the opposition advances, in particular on damascus, that the regime might very well consider the use of chemical weapons. the whole world is watching. the whole world's watching very closely. the president of the united states has made very clear that there will be cons qenszs. -- consequences. there will be consequences if the assad regime makes a terrible mistake by using these chemical weapons on their open people. i'm not going to speculate or comment on what those potential consequences would be. it's fair enough to say that use of those we
revolutionary guard corps. hillary clinton a couple years ago said iran was edging close league to be in the military to peter should. i wonder when marina talks about this long history of abuse of political prisoners by the agents of that abuse had changed over this 20, 30 year span and whether the increased role has an impact on the human rights landscape. is the power of military know me making matters worse? >> thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. and thanks to ftd for arranging a panel discussion about human rights. it's rather interesting that in the city in washington d.c., most panels about iran are about the nuclear program. that is almost nothing that the human rights program. the iranian audience in the reading public because it means you care about your own security. you care about the implications of the islamic republic coming into an armed state. what happens in iran does not really matter to washington. this is the signal washington has been sending to iran and i think this panel and ftd's initiative to make human rights issue a more important issue on agen
obama made the statement about syria and chemical weapons again and secretary clinton did. we understand the red line. the world, this week, certainly growing concern about syria's potential use of chemical weapons. can we ask you your view on this. how concerned are you? how imminent are your concerns? and should assad believe that his weapons are sheltered and safe from potential -- a potential response in a potential military action by anyone? >> well, without commenting on the specific intelligence that we have with regards to the chemical weapons, there is no question that we remain very concerned, very concerned that as the ouch suggestion advances in particular damascus and the regime, we very well consider the use of chemical well -- weapons. the whole world is watching. the world is watching very closely. and the president of the united states has made very clear that there will be cops consequenceses -- consequences there will be consequences if the assad regime makes a terrible mistake by using these chemical weapons. i'm not going speculate, comment on what the potential cons
, but i could go back to knot the use of the filibuster but other methods of obstruction with bill clinton who reached out all the time. so i think that's the factor but a minor one. i think harry reid's use of filling the amendment tree, partly this is chicken and egg, but has been done too much and that didn't result in at least some protests and willingness of some senators on his side who might otherwise have joined in some of these filibusters to do so. it had much more to do with a concerted party strategy can which i think is the first time we have seen it. >> i think there's two separate issues. one, obstruction on nominations, and to come obstruction on -- [inaudible] it is true you see these judges and it will go 99 points. but i think it's important to remember what we are talking about. the alternative to that is to move it by unanimous consent. it's not like the house where there is about. and if a member of checks to unanimous consent because they do not want to vote, don't want to be forced to vote for a judge, they say i will have a roll call. now, the majority leader at th
, and secretary clinton moves throughout the region as well as secretary panetta, and the amount of activities i do and my forces do is a prompt jump than what we did in the past, and we're looking for opportunities to do more exercise. we are doing more of those things already, and that's viz l to the allies. i think it's visible to the partners, and i feel it visible to the region. we oftenment to jump to, well, where's the next aircraft carry your or the submarine. that's the signal. we will, over time, as you've heard secretary panetta say, rebalance towards the pacific, and i mentioned opening remarks. we're rapidly moving the most capable assets into the region because of the ballistic missile defense threats we face and those things, so it's about a holistic approach, and what i do on the military side is just one aspect of it. it's got to be tie into the economic side, what's happening in the diplomatic side, and so we're working hard that accomplishes this strategy. >> a quick question. you started to do or plan to do rotational b-52 deployments to northern australia. >> well, you've se
that president was in cambodia right after the election. he was in burma. secretary clinton moved widely throughout the region as does secretary panetta. and the amount of activities that i do and my forces do have been a prompt jump in what we've done in the past, and we're looking for opportunities to do more exercise. we're doing more of those things already. i think it's visible to our allies. i think it's visible to our partners. not to be invisible to the region. we also want to jump, where's the next summary our aircraft carrier, that's always the sake of. and we will, over time as you heard secretary panetta said, we will rebalance our navy towards the pacific, and i party mentioned in my opening remarks, we are rapidly moving our most capable assets in the region because of some of the ballistic missile defense will be facing of those types of things. so i think it's not about one thing. it's about a holistic approach, and what if you on the military side is only one aspect of a. it's got to be tied to what's happening in the economic side in what's happening in the diplomatic s
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6